37 ms·

My main observation here is 1. Technically it might be possible to search the Internet, but it might not surface correct and/or useful information. 2. High-va

My main observation here is 1. Technically it might be possible to search the Internet, but it might not surface correct and/or useful information. 2. High-value information that would make a research report valuable is rarely public nor free. This holds especially true in capital-intensive or regulated industries.

simonw 1y ago
I fully expect one of the AI-related business models going forward to be charging subscriptions for LLM search tool access to those kinds of archives. ChatGPT plus an extra $30/month for search access to a specific archive would make sense to me.
- sshine 1y ago
  Kagi is $10/mo. for search and +$15/mo. for premium LLMs with agentic access to search.
  - AlotOfReading 1y ago
    What they're talking about is access to professional archives like EBSCOnet or Bloomberg, which usually don't sell to individuals in the first place and start at tens of thousands of dollars per seat for institutional access.
    - JustFinishedBSG 1y ago
      Ofc Mistral model is a lot worse but for $14.99 you get access to AFP news. So OpenAI for $60 for the same things would be a huge joke
  - ac29 1y ago
    The $10 plan includes the LLM assistant a now as well (with a more limited selection of models than the $25 plan).
- jsemrau 1y ago
  Then I'd rather see domain-specific agent-first data. I.e., not a simple API call but token->BM25->token
hadlock 1y ago
o3/o4 seem to know how to search things like pypi, crates.io, pkg.go.dev etc and apply those changes on the first try. My application (running on an older version of code) had a breaking change to how the event controller functioned in the newer version, o3 looked at the documentation and rewrote it to use the new event controller. It used to be that you were trapped with the LLM being 3-8 months behind on package versions.
- simonw 1y ago
  Huh, now I'm thinking that maybe a target for release notes should be to provide enough details that a good LLM can be used to apply fixes for any breaking changes.
  - rd 1y ago
    MCP maybe? A release notes MCP (maybe into ReadTheDocs or pypi) that understands upgrade instructions for every package.
    - sanderjd 1y ago
      This is the thing I don't really love about MCP: Why should it require a separate protocol, rather than just good readable documentation?
      - navinsylvester 1y ago
        Ironically, https://context7.com/ https://context7.com/
        sitkack 1y ago
        This is devdocs to be consumed by LLMs, https://github.com/upstash/context7 https://github.com/upstash/context7 Brilliant (and one less think I don't have to build)!
        1y ago
TrackerFF 1y ago
I'm not a researcher, but don't most researchers these days also upload their work to arXiv? Sure, it's not a journal - but in some fields (Machine Learning, Math) it seems like everyone also uploads their stuff there. So if the models can crawls sites like arXiv, at least there's some decent stuff to be found.
- levocardia 1y ago
  Not outside of ML, physics, and math. Preprints are extremely rare in many (dare I say most) scientific fields, and of course many times you are interested in not the cutting edge work, but the foundational work in a field from the 60s, 70s, or 80s, all of which is locked behind a paywall. Or at least it's supposed to be, and corporate LLMs are not "allowed" to go poking around on sketchy Russian website for non-paywalled versions.
  - qingcharles 1y ago
    I'm assuming many AI companies are probably scraping all the PDFs from the "shadow libraries" of the world that have done some of the work of liberating these papers from behind their paywalls. Obviously it's legally unsettled territory right now...
- jsemrau 1y ago
  Proper research, especially the one contributed to conferences, is hard to get by and is usually managed by the conference organizers. Arxiv has some, but it's limited. It would be great if for a DeepSearch tool for ML, I could just use Arxiv as a source and have the Agent search this. But so far I have not found a working Arxiv tool that does this well.

simonw 1y ago

I fully expect one of the AI-related business models going forward to be charging subscriptions for LLM search tool access to those kinds of archives. ChatGPT plus an extra $30/month for search access to a specific archive would make sense to me.

sshine 1y ago
Kagi is $10/mo. for search and +$15/mo. for premium LLMs with agentic access to search.
- AlotOfReading 1y ago
  What they're talking about is access to professional archives like EBSCOnet or Bloomberg, which usually don't sell to individuals in the first place and start at tens of thousands of dollars per seat for institutional access.
  - JustFinishedBSG 1y ago
    Ofc Mistral model is a lot worse but for $14.99 you get access to AFP news. So OpenAI for $60 for the same things would be a huge joke
- ac29 1y ago
  The $10 plan includes the LLM assistant a now as well (with a more limited selection of models than the $25 plan).
jsemrau 1y ago
Then I'd rather see domain-specific agent-first data. I.e., not a simple API call but token->BM25->token

hadlock 1y ago

o3/o4 seem to know how to search things like pypi, crates.io, pkg.go.dev etc and apply those changes on the first try. My application (running on an older version of code) had a breaking change to how the event controller functioned in the newer version, o3 looked at the documentation and rewrote it to use the new event controller. It used to be that you were trapped with the LLM being 3-8 months behind on package versions.

simonw 1y ago
Huh, now I'm thinking that maybe a target for release notes should be to provide enough details that a good LLM can be used to apply fixes for any breaking changes.
- rd 1y ago
  MCP maybe? A release notes MCP (maybe into ReadTheDocs or pypi) that understands upgrade instructions for every package.
  - sanderjd 1y ago
    This is the thing I don't really love about MCP: Why should it require a separate protocol, rather than just good readable documentation?
    - navinsylvester 1y ago
      Ironically, https://context7.com/ https://context7.com/
      - sitkack 1y ago
        This is devdocs to be consumed by LLMs, https://github.com/upstash/context7 https://github.com/upstash/context7 Brilliant (and one less think I don't have to build)!
        1y ago

TrackerFF 1y ago

I'm not a researcher, but don't most researchers these days also upload their work to arXiv? Sure, it's not a journal - but in some fields (Machine Learning, Math) it seems like everyone also uploads their stuff there. So if the models can crawls sites like arXiv, at least there's some decent stuff to be found.

levocardia 1y ago
Not outside of ML, physics, and math. Preprints are extremely rare in many (dare I say most) scientific fields, and of course many times you are interested in not the cutting edge work, but the foundational work in a field from the 60s, 70s, or 80s, all of which is locked behind a paywall. Or at least it's supposed to be, and corporate LLMs are not "allowed" to go poking around on sketchy Russian website for non-paywalled versions.
- qingcharles 1y ago
  I'm assuming many AI companies are probably scraping all the PDFs from the "shadow libraries" of the world that have done some of the work of liberating these papers from behind their paywalls. Obviously it's legally unsettled territory right now...
jsemrau 1y ago
Proper research, especially the one contributed to conferences, is hard to get by and is usually managed by the conference organizers. Arxiv has some, but it's limited. It would be great if for a DeepSearch tool for ML, I could just use Arxiv as a source and have the Agent search this. But so far I have not found a working Arxiv tool that does this well.